Chewing gum

  • Thread starter Thread starter twoangels
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

twoangels

Guest
From the Summa: "And just as the use of food is directed to the preservation of life in the individual, so is the use of venereal acts directed to the preservation of the whole human race. Hence Augustine says (De Bono Conjug. xvi): “What food is to a man’s well being, such is sexual intercourse to the welfare of the whole human race.” Wherefore just as the use of food can be without sin, if it be taken in due manner and order, as required for the welfare of the body, so also the use of venereal acts can be without sin, provided they be performed in due manner and order, in keeping with the end of human procreation. "

So how come chewing gum is not a sin? Silly question, but its the one question my husband and I have not found an answer for. It just seems the question gets dismissed as silly.
 
Food for further thought:

'Various Errors on Moral Subjects

Eating and drinking even to satiety for pleasure only, are not sinful, provided this does not stand in the way of health, since any natural appetite can licitly enjoy its own actions.

[Condemned in a decree of the Holy Office, March 4, 1679]’

‘It is incontrovertible that to eat or drink for the mere pleasure of the experience, and for that exclusively, is likewise to commit the sin of gluttony.’

Catholic Encyclopedia

‘GLUTTONY is an inordinate love of eating and drinking. We are not forbidden to feel pleasure in either the one or the other; for it is by a wise foresight that God has seasoned with a feeling of gratification the use of the food necessary for preserving our health and life. But we abuse this blessing when we seek only the pleasure alone; we must eat and drink in order to live, and not to flatter sensuality. Our sole end should be to satisfy the wants of nature, that we may be enabled to fulfil our duties and serve God, according to the words of the Apostle: “Whether you eat, or drink, do all for the glory of God.” If we wish to observe this precept of St. Paul, we must, in our repasts, think not of gratifying the body, but of following the order of God, who wills that we should preserve life. To seek only the gratification of the senses is gluttony, a vice unworthy of man : it weighs down the soul, brutalizes the mind, ruins the health and shortens life.’

St. Peter Julian Eymard

‘Temperance requires that people should only eat at regular hours, if it be at all possible.’

St. Peter Julian Eymard
 
It’s actually an interesting question!

My answer would be that chewing gum could be viewed as good for the body, in that it can alleviate stress, some of the sugar-free ones claim to help the teeth and breath etc. I mean there is a reason we keep chewing even when the flavour’s gone right?

But the question does raise the consideration of lust v gluttony. In my own experience, I consider lust to be a more widely destructive force.
 
Simply, which commandment would chewing gum break?

Fornication, adultery, masturbation, etc are all sins against the 6th commandment.

scborromeo.org/confess.htm
**

SIXTH COMMANDMENT​

**
**“You shall not commit adultery.” (Ex 20:14) **

Note: In the area of deliberate sexual sins listed below, all are mortal sins if there is sufficient reflection and full consent of the will. “No fornicators, idolaters, or adulterers, no sodomites,… will inherit the kingdom of God.” (1 Cor 6:9-10) “Anyone who looks lustfully at a woman has already committed adultery with her in his thoughts.” (Mt 5:28)
  • Did I willfully entertain impure thoughts or desires?
  • Did I use impure or suggestive words? Tell impure stories? Listen to them?
  • Did I deliberately look at impure TV, videos, plays, pictures or movies? Or deliberately read impure materials?
  • Did I commit impure acts by myself (masturbation)?
  • Did I commit impure acts with another - fornication (premarital sex), adultery (sex with a married person)?
  • Did I practice artificial birth control (by pills, device, withdrawal)?
  • Did I marry or advise anyone to marry outside the Church?
  • Did I avoid the occasions of impurity?
  • Did I try to control my thoughts?
  • Did I engage in homosexual activity?
  • Did I respect all members of the opposite sex, or have I thought of other people as objects?
  • Did I or my spouse have sterilization done?
  • Did I abuse my marriage rights?
 
From the Summa: "And just as the use of food is directed to the preservation of life in the individual, so is the use of venereal acts directed to the preservation of the whole human race. Hence Augustine says (De Bono Conjug. xvi): “What food is to a man’s well being, such is sexual intercourse to the welfare of the whole human race.” Wherefore just as the use of food can be without sin, if it be taken in due manner and order, as required for the welfare of the body, so also the use of venereal acts can be without sin, provided they be performed in due manner and order, in keeping with the end of human procreation. "

So how come chewing gum is not a sin? Silly question, but its the one question my husband and I have not found an answer for. It just seems the question gets dismissed as silly.
Can it be without sin Yes – it can be for the purpose of “recreation” (which is important for our life) etc and can also assist in other aspects of life.

Now if you take it out and put it in the long hair of the girl sitting in front of you…now that is sinful!

…or if your knowingly “smacking your gum” in the movie theater while sitting next to me. That be a hanging offense.
 
Can it be without sin Yes – it can be for the purpose of “recreation” (which is important for our life) etc and can also assist in other aspects of life.

Now if you take it out and put it in the long hair of the girl sitting in front of you…now that is sinful!
Or drop it in the floor causing someone to ruin a good pair of shoes.
 
Only on CAF! 🤷

No offence to the OP. 😛 The question seems innocently asked and it has provoked an interesting discussion.
 
Chewing gum in church is definitely wrong. I think it also breaks the fast, correct?
 
It’s actually an interesting question!

My answer would be that chewing gum could be viewed as good for the body, in that it can alleviate stress, some of the sugar-free ones claim to help the teeth and breath etc. I mean there is a reason we keep chewing even when the flavour’s gone right?

But the question does raise the consideration of lust v gluttony. In my own experience, I consider lust to be a more widely destructive force.
"St. Gregory the Great, a doctor of the Church, described five ways by which one can commit sin of gluttony, and corresponding biblical examples for each of them:[3]
  1. Eating before the time of meals in order to satisfy the palate.
    Biblical example: Jonathan eating a little honey, when his father Saul commanded no food to be taken before the evening.[1Sa 14:29]
  2. Seeking delicacies and better quality of food to gratify the “vile sense of taste.”
    Biblical example: When Israelites escaping from Egypt complained, “Who shall give us flesh to eat ? We remember the fish which we did eat in Egypt freely ; the cucumbers and the melons, and the leeks and the onions and the garlic,” God rained fowls for them to eat but punished them 500 years later.[Num 11:4]
  3. Seeking after sauces and seasonings for the enjoyment of the palate.
    Biblical example: Two sons of Eli the high priest made the sacrificial meat to be cooked in one manner rather than another. They were met with death.[1Sa 4:11]
  4. Exceeding the necessary amount of food.
    Biblical example: One of the sins of Sodom was “fullness of bread.”[Eze 16:49]
  5. Taking food with too much eagerness, even when eating the proper amount, and even if the food is not luxurious.
    Biblical example: Esau selling his birthright for ordinary food of bread and pottage of lentils. His punishment was that the “profane person . . . who, for a morsel of meat sold his birthright,” we learn that " he found no place for repentance, though he sought it carefully, with tears." [Gen 25:30] The fifth way is worse than all others, said St. Gregory, because it shows attachment to pleasure most clearly. To recapitulate, St Gregory the Great said that one may succumb to the sin of gluttony by: 1. Time (when); 2. Quality; 3. Stimulants; 4. Quantity; 5. Eagerness
    In his Summa Theologica (Part 2-2, Question 148, Article 4), St. Thomas Aquinas reiterated the list of five ways to commit gluttony:
    Laute - eating food that is too luxurious, exotic, or costly
    Nimis - eating food that is excessive in quantity
    Studiose - eating food that is too daintily or elaborately prepared
    Praepropere - eating too soon, or at an inappropriate time
    Ardenter - eating too eagerly."
"According to Sacred Origins of Profound Things, by Charles Panati, Greek monastic theologian Evagrius of Pontus first drew up a list of eight offenses and wicked human passions:. They were, in order of increasing seriousness: gluttony, lust, avarice, sadness, anger, acedia, vainglory, and pride. Evagrius saw the escalating severity as representing increasing fixation with the self, with pride as the most egregious of the sins. Acedia (from the Greek “akedia,” or “not to care”) denoted “spiritual sloth.”

In the late 6th century, Pope Gregory the Great reduced the list to seven items, folding vainglory into pride, acedia into sadness, and adding envy. His ranking of the Sins’ seriousness was based on the degree from which they offended against love. It was, from most serious to least: pride, envy, anger, sadness, avarice, gluttony, and lust. Later theologians, including St. Thomas Aquinas, would contradict the notion that the seriousness of the sins could be ranked in this way. The term “covetousness” has historically been used interchangeably with “avarice” in accounts of the Deadly Sins. In the seventeenth century, the Church replaced the vague sin of “sadness” with sloth. "

Huh, so much for educating my conscience. Now I’m utterly confused.
 
Good to read the above.

I think what is helpful for eating detatchedly, rather than focusing on the sensual pleasure of eating as a primary goal – which is very easy to do, is first of all, to say grace before meals, and to give thanksgiving to God after meals. This is a Christian duty in any case.

With prayer one can take a different and virtuous view of eating by God’s graces.

To focus on the spiritual and not the material and sensual. Eating is for sustaining life, for the sake of God, with the pleasure not the main or direct focus.

The battle vs. gluttony is a constant and regular, if small, spiritual training experience for everyday life. One can develop basic virtues, for example, of fortitude in it for use everywhere.

‘If it be the duty of a Christian to pray to God before meals, he is not less bound to thank him after having made use of the gifts which came from his bountiful hand. It is, therefore, necessary to make, after every meal, a short but fervent act of thanksgiving.’

St. Jean Baptiste de la Salle

“As long as the vice of gluttony has a hold on a man, all that he has done valiantly is forfeited by him: and as long as the belly is unrestrained, all virtue comes to naught.”

Pope St. Gregory the Great

‘How foolishly we act, not realizing that the first of all the virtues is humility, just as the first of all the passions is gluttony and desire for worldly things.’

St. Anthony the Great

‘You have taught me to approach the consumption of food as I would medicine.’

St. Augustine

‘It is also necessary to abstain from superfluity of food. St. Jerome asserts that satiety of the stomach provokes incontinence. And St. Bonaventure says: “Impurity is nourished by eating to excess.” But on the other hand, fasting, as the holy Church teaches, represses vice and produces virtue: “O God, who by corporal fasting dost suppress vice, dost elevate the mind, and dost confer virtues and rewards.” St. Thomas has written that when the devil is conquered by those whom he tempts to gluttony, he ceases to tempt them to impurity.’

St. Alphonsus Maria de Liguori

‘The first thing you are to observe at table, is not to make known what you would like, accepting for the love of God the meats which you do not relish, and depriving yourself of those which would be agreeable to your palate; you will observe besides a great modesty, recalling to your mind incessantly the presence of God, Whose service ought alone to occupy you. If you want anything, you will try to do without it, rejoicing interiorly at this privation; you will never be the first to commence eating; you will add nothing to season the meats which will be presented to you, and eating without eagerness, you will occupy yourself with God.’

St. Alphonsus Rodriguez
 
The Church lists gluttony as one of the seven deadly sins. Are you denying this?
It helps to understand what the Church means by seven deadly sins…

ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=404129&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2004&Author=&Keyword=gluttony&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=5&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ReplyDate+DESC&start_at=
Seven deadly sins
****Question from on 06-21-2004:****What are the seven deadly sins or is there no such thing?

Answer by David Gregson on 07-29-2004: They are pride, avarice, envy, wrath, lust, gluttony, and sloth (or acedia). These seven sins, traditionally called “deadly,” are called “capital” in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1866). Capital sins are more dispositions to sin in particular ways than actual sins themselves. They are deadly because all sins stem from them, and sin (unless repented) leads to death, i.e., death of the soul, which is the original reason for death of the body as well.
Also from the catechism:
1865 Sin creates a proclivity to sin; it engenders vice by repetition of the same acts. This results in perverse inclinations which cloud conscience and corrupt the concrete judgment of good and evil. Thus sin tends to reproduce itself and reinforce itself, but it cannot destroy the moral sense at its root. 1866 Vices can be classified according to the virtues they oppose, or also be linked to the capital sins which Christian experience has distinguished, following St. John Cassian and St. Gregory the Great. They are called “capital” because they engender other sins, other vices.138 They are pride, avarice, envy, wrath, lust, gluttony, and sloth or acedia
Also perhaps the commandment most associated with gluttony would be the seventh and tenth.
"You shall not steal." (Ex 20:15) “You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods.” (Ex 20:17)
  • Did I steal, cheat, help or encourage others to steal or keep stolen goods? Have I made restitution for stolen goods?
  • Did I fulfill my contracts; give or accept bribes; pay my bills; rashly gamble or speculate; deprive my family of the necessities of life?
  • Did I waste time at work, school or at home?
  • Did I envy other people’s families or possessions?
  • Did I make material possessions the purpose of my life?
 
So how come chewing gum is not a sin? Silly question, but its the one question my husband and I have not found an answer for. It just seems the question gets dismissed as silly.
Chewing gum generally removes all digestible nutrients (the sugar alcohols) before you throw away the indegestible part. Not like contraception at all.

The parallel to contraception would be binging and purging. (In other words pigging out, but making yourself throw up so you do’t gain weight as a result of it). That would be a sin of gluttony just like contraception is a sin of lust.

Good discussion.

Here’s a tougher one: Is it immoral to chemically create a fat substitute ingredient to allow snacks to have all the desirable traits of fatty foods, but the synthetic fat is actually indigestible and goes right through you? (I think this is actually how Olestra works). I’m not smart enough to know the answer to that one!
 
It’s actually an interesting question!

My answer would be that chewing gum could be viewed as good for the body, in that it can alleviate stress, some of the sugar-free ones claim to help the teeth and breath etc. I mean there is a reason we keep chewing even when the flavour’s gone right?

But the question does raise the consideration of lust v gluttony. In my own experience, I consider lust to be a more widely destructive force.
You could theoretically argue the same thing about male masturbation. It relieves stress. Some medical research indicates it can possibly keep sperm healthy. I have a medical text at home (my wife is a physician) prescribing it as a conservative treatment for early benign prostatic hyperplasia (enlarged prostate) with far fewer side effects than medication or surgery (both of which can affect fertility not that it matters at the age most men experience this).

However, chewing gum doesn’t inherently interfere with or inhibit nutritional and digestive processes whereas masturbation and contraception do interfere and inhibit the procreative/unitive process.
 
I have a few questions on gluttony. Is gluttony a mortal or venial sin and do we have to confess every time we eat a tasty meal. Can someone help me understand how seasoning your food is evil and sinful?
 
It helps to understand what the Church means by seven deadly sins…

ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=404129&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2004&Author=&Keyword=gluttony&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=5&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ReplyDate+DESC&start_at=
Also from the catechism:

Also perhaps the commandment most associated with gluttony would be the seventh and tenth.
I know what the seven deadly sins are not acts of sin. However, acting on them is sinful, so you’re still missing the point.
 
Chewing gum generally removes all digestible nutrients (the sugar alcohols) before you throw away the indegestible part. Not like contraception at all.

The parallel to contraception would be binging and purging. (In other words pigging out, but making yourself throw up so you do’t gain weight as a result of it). That would be a sin of gluttony just like contraception is a sin of lust.

Good discussion.

Here’s a tougher one: Is it immoral to chemically create a fat substitute ingredient to allow snacks to have all the desirable traits of fatty foods, but the synthetic fat is actually indigestible and goes right through you? (I think this is actually how Olestra works). I’m not smart enough to know the answer to that one!
Ok, I’ve been reading more of the Summa on my Kindle. There is a part in one of the objections where he references “The Philosopher” as stating that semen originates from excess food and compares it to sweat and human waste. I don’t believe I saw Aquinas refute this specific point, and I think it is highly likely that their human biology at the time was very limited. So far what I read, Aquinas seems to reduce vice merely to the pursue more than you need. This seems based on the idea that it conflicts with right reason. He seems to discourage snacking, when nutritionists will actually say it is far better to graze all day than two fast and binge as we traditionally do. Granted, we binge on meals three times a day out of necessity.

It would seem to me that applying the idea of right reason to food with our current knowledge, we would more of have a moral obligation to as healthy as we can. Its not just fat or excess that is bad for you. Eating processed food tends to be very unhealthy. At the very least, we should consider that it is not only healthy for us, but morally better for us to learn about nutrition and strive to take care of our bodies. We are, after all, temples of the Holy Spirit.

I wonder if the priest would give me a funny look if I started confessing going to McDonald’s.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top